similar to: Altivec, automake

On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 03:30:22PM +0400, lvqcl wrote: > BTW, what can you say about the following place in stream_decoder.c > in read_subframe_lpc_() function: > > /*@@@@@@ technically not pessimistic enough, should be more like > if( (FLAC__uint64)order * ((((FLAC__uint64)1)<<bps)-1) * ((1<<subframe->qlp_coeff_precision)-1) < (((FLAC__uint64)-1)

Here's what I listed in that email. Merging doesn't appear to be necessary. If you have any build problems, let me know. Note that my detection code is Darwin-specific. It's a BSD call (sysctl()), so a change to the platform-detection macros should enable it to work on other BSDs. However, I don't know what that would be, and I couldn't determine any safe way to do the check

I have noticed lpc slowdown both in encoding and decoding, not related to new config.h stuff. It seems there is wrong choosing of fastest possible version of lpc function. Patch is attached. -- Miroslav Lichvar -------------- next part -------------- Index: src/libFLAC/stream_decoder.c =================================================================== RCS file:

On Thu, 2007-04-05 at 02:27 -0700, Brian Willoughby wrote: > Josh (Green), > > Seems like the longest example in your list is a 15-second file. I > would like to see the same problem exhibited in a file that is of a > normal length. I have been recording full performances lasting > hours, and flac always compresses the files below 70% of the original > size. >

Erik de Castro Lopo wrote: > I think I have an alternative fix for the CVE which should not break > seeking. I'm working on getting an copy of the file with which to test. Patch applied and pushed. commit b4b2910bdca010808ccf2799f55562fa91f4347b Author: Erik de Castro Lopo <erikd at mega-nerd.com> Date: Wed Dec 10 18:54:16 2014 +1100

The following series adds initial vector support for PowerPC64. On POWER9, flac --best is about 3.3x faster. Amitay Isaacs (2): Add m4 macro to check for C __attribute__ features Check if compiler supports target attribute on ppc64 Anton Blanchard (5): configure.ac: Remove SPE detection code configure.ac: Add VSX enable/disable configure.ac: Fix FLAC__CPU_PPC on little endian, and add

Running the basic (--disable-thorough-tests) test suite, I get these failures round-trip test (rt-1-24-111.raw) encode... Segmentation fault (core dumped) ERROR FAIL: ./test_flac.sh fsd24-01 (--channels=1 --bps=24 -0 -l 16 --lax -m -e -p): encode...ERROR during encode of fsd24-01 FAIL: ./test_streams.sh on alpha and amd64. By contrast, i386 is fine. (All OpenBSD/4.2.) Could be a generic LP64

I changed just the FLAC__EntropyCodingMethod_PartitionedRice struct, but it hasn't changed a thing. I'm still getting the same behaviour. typedef struct { unsigned order; unsigned parameters[1 << 6]; unsigned raw_bits[1 << 6]; } FLAC__EntropyCodingMethod_PartitionedRice; Any other thoughts? Thanks, Reza Josh Coalson wrote: > --- Reza Naima

1) lpc.c, FLAC__lpc_quantize_coefficients(): This function declares "const int nshift = -(*shift)" variable when *shift is less than 0. Then nshift is used in the loop: for(i = 0; i < order; i++) { error += lp_coeff[i] / (1 << nshift); This patch adds "const int pshift = *shift" variable. Pros: * more symmetry for two branches * compiler doesn't

To avoid crash caused by an unbound LPC decoding when predictor order is larger than blocksize, the sanity check needs to be moved to the subframe decoding functions. --- src/libFLAC/stream_decoder.c | 30 ++++++++++++------------------ 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/libFLAC/stream_decoder.c b/src/libFLAC/stream_decoder.c index d13b23b..211b4db 100644 ---

Miroslav Lichvar wrote: > On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 07:45:53PM +1000, Erik de Castro Lopo wrote: > > The fix was changing one local variable from FLAC_uint32 to FLAC_uint64 > > in function precompute_partition_info_sums_(). > > > > https://git.xiph.org/?p=flac.git;a=commit;h=6f7ec60c7e7f05f5ab0b1cf6b7b0945e44afcd4b > > I don't like this fix. It will

On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 06:25:57PM +0400, lvqcl wrote: > Now I wonder why evaluate_lpc_subframe_() function in stream_encoder.c contains > almost the same code, but without any comments that it's not enough pessimistic: > evaluate_lpc_subframe_(): > > if(subframe_bps + qlp_coeff_precision + FLAC__bitmath_ilog2(order) <= 32) > if(subframe_bps <= 16 &&

On Thu, 27 Jan 2005, John Steele Scott wrote: > That looks fine to me as well. However, the best solution is something which > Luca suggested a few months ago, which is to use the functions defined in > altivec.h. These are C functions which map directly to Altivec machine > instructions. I am willing to help out, but I don't find the current lpc_asm.s > very easy to follow, and

On Mon, Dec 1, 2014 at 10:40 PM, ???? ?????? <bart.gopnik at gmail.com> wrote: > Please help me solve the following problem: > > FLAC tools have a lots of warnings about non-subset files during > encoding, but unfortunately don't have easy way to check/test existing > FLAC stream for subset compliance. > > "flac -a" generates the big text file that has

Torsdag, 23 januar 2003, skrev Tor-Einar Jarnbjo <Tor-Einar_Jarnbjo@grosch- link.de>: >According to the format description, the coding method has to be 0. > >I've been using libFLAC 1.0.4 to encode the stream. I've checked my interpretation against "flac -a" and it seems to read 17 bits for each warmup sample. Here is its output: frame=168 blocksize=4608

>> Ok I will give it a try and see what I can come up with. > Is the most interesting data the [frame] and [subframe] info? > Is the qlp_coeff[], warmpup[] and parameter[] data for each frame/subframe important? Yes, it would be nice if MetaFLAC will show minimum and maximum values of parameters (if are not constant/fixed) for the stream. And it would be VERY NICE if you implement

Josh Coalson wrote in 2009 <http://lists.xiph.org/pipermail/flac-dev/2009-April/002654.html>: "the reference encoder has avoided negative shifts entirely since 1.1.4. negative shifts were meant to be positive shifts in the opposite direction but they were implemented directly with << >> and in C negative shifts are undefined. treat as an error for now to avoid bad behavior

On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 03:30:06PM +0200, Miroslav Lichvar wrote: > But, as we have seen with unusual data the residual signal can be > wider than bps. The FLAC format specification doesn't seem to mention > this. Should it be treated as a valid FLAC stream? I think it would be interesting to know how common are such streams. I patched flac to print a warning on decoding or testing

When I was trying to find yesterday's xmms-plugin bug, i have noticed that seeking in stream without seek-table isn't very good. With attached patch it is much better. -- Miroslav Lichvar -------------- next part -------------- --- src/libFLAC/seekable_stream_decoder.c.orig 2003-02-26 19:41:51.000000000 +0100 +++ src/libFLAC/seekable_stream_decoder.c 2003-07-09 23:49:35.000000000 +0200

Ok, the patch from 2003 about improving seeking still didn't make it to CVS, so here is another try. I made some benchmarking with the test_seeking utility from flac sources to show how bad the current seeking is, especially without seektable. Track used for the experiment had about 50 minutes. In the following table is average number of seeks and number of decoded frames required for one